Lloyd’s Register used closed-loop improvement cycle approach in relation to the nature of their business for business assurance and improvement; Evaluate its closed-loop improvement, and could this type of approach be adapted for a government department
In: Operations Management
Case Study 1
Quick Biotech
It is late in September 2010, and Michelle Chang, a doctoral
student at the National
University of Singapore (NUS), is to meet her colleagues Henry Tan
and Mike
Hammer from the Institute of Molecular Biology again in a few days
to discuss the
course of action to be pursued for the establishment of Quick
Biotech. Henry Tan
and Mike Hammer both hold doctorates in biology and work at NUS as
senior
assistants. A few months before, they patented a process for the
production of multi
protein complexes, which they had already put to successful use,
and about which
they had received favourable feedback. Now, the three colleagues
want to set-up a
company called Quick Biotech in order to apply the new technology
to a wider field.
Background
The human body is exposed to numerous external influences and
internal genetic
defects, which cause the proteins in our cells to malfunction.
Proteins constitute the
basis of all biological processes. If proteins no longer fulfill
their function adequately
owing to defects, this often results in life-threatening illnesses,
such as cancer. This
is why almost all drugs have effect on proteins. Consequently, most
research and
development work for drugs and therapies need protein, which is why
both academic
research institutions and the pharmaceutical companies use proteins
as a basis to
their research activities.
Recently, progress in fundamental research revealed the total of
the proteins in a
cell, which in the case of human being amounts to more than 40,000
proteins. It
became obvious that the proteins in a cell do not work
individually; rather, they
combine to act as protein complexes that are made up of numerous
protein
components. In addition, virtually all biological processes in
cells are executed by
such protein complexes. This has crucial consequences for research;
in order to
understand how proteins work, protein machines must be explored as
a whole, and
not only their individual protein components.
Nonetheless, academic institutes and the pharmaceutical industry
have almost
exclusively focused on individual, isolated proteins. The primary
reason for this was
that human protein machines are very difficult to produce in a pure
form. Although
the development of modern, recombinant methods now enables the
production of
individual protein components, there is still a demand for a
technology that is able to
provide sufficient volumes of entire protein machine, which form
the basis of
biological functions. This is also Michelle’s, Henry’s and Mike’s
experience in their
research at NUS. They realize that no suitable technology for the
production of
protein machines exists. This is why they developed their own
technology: the
MultiBac technology.
The technology
The MultiBac technology uses a modified, yet greatly improved
version of the so
called “baculovirus gene transfer vector” to produce any
combination of proteins in
great volumes and of high quality. The genes of a great number of
proteins, such as
human ones, can be placed on this gene transfer vector. This
process can be carried
out in an ordinary molecular biology laboratory. The MultiBca gene
transfer vector
multiplies in cell cultures and constitutes no danger to human
beings. Therefore, no
special health and safety regulations are required to work with
this system.
The gene transfer vector of the MultiBac system was developed to
provide it with a
unique feature namely, that is particularly careful in the
production of the desired
protein machines. For customers, this is a guarantee of the
unsurpassed quality of
the protein complex produced with the MultiBac technology. In
comparison with
conventional processes, the simplified MultiBac technology
additionally saves a
substantial amount of time for the production of the desired
protein product: it only
takes weeks rather than months. Also, the technology offers the
possibility to build
numerous different protein complexes from the same protein
components on a
modular basis and, thus, of supplying individual solution to
customers’ problems.
Laboratories of renowned research institutes already use MultiBac,
which NUS has
made available as trial specimens. This shows that the technology
works, is mature
and has a selling potential. The process was patented last year by
NUS, and since
then it was developed in the context of employment at the
university. However, the
rights can be assigned to a start up, for instance, in the form of
an exclusive license.
The next steps to launch the venture
In autumn 2010, Michelle is in the final stages of her doctoral
thesis, which she
wants to complete by the year. After that, she needs to work full
time for the new
company. In contrast, Henry and Mike want to retain their jobs at
NUS and spend
less time on the company. As such, they would not be involved in
the company’s
operative daily business but will assume an advisory function. They
will receive
shares in the start-up but will not be on the company
payroll.
One of the key roles of Henry and Mike will be to guarantee long
term access to the
latest findings in scientific research. This model, whereby some of
the founders
remain at the university, has already proved successful in a number
of other
biotechnology start ups. Research in the field of biotechnology is
very costly; both in
terms of time and money, so only by retaining close links with a
research institution
will the company ensure that it will always work with the latest
technologies and,
thus, remain competitive.
One of the greatest challenges currently perceived by the team is
to secure funding
for the new company. Although the founders are able to invest
S$200, 000 of their
personal savings into the enterprise and, thus, realize a small
scale start up, present
plans are based on the assumption that at least S$500 000 of
external capital will be
needed for the first two years.
These funds will primarily serve to finance Michelle’s position and
a small team of lab
assistants in charge of producing the protein complex for the
clients. The product will
be sold via a network of sales agents, and other functions, such as
accounting and
finance, will be outsourced to a professional accountant.
Answer all questions.
1. Should Michelle consider debt or equity to finance QuickBiotech?
Explain your
answer.
2. Would you consider any alternative sources or finance? Which
one? Why?
3. Analyse other issues to be addressed before QuickBiotech is
launched.
Please write all your answers in essay format. Do not answer in
point-form unless
the questions mention “List” or “State”. It is not necessary to
precede each answer
with an introduction and end with a summary. Proceed directly with
the answer
In: Operations Management
Case Study 1
Quick Biotech
It is late in September 2010, and Michelle Chang, a doctoral
student at the National
University of Singapore (NUS), is to meet her colleagues Henry Tan
and Mike Hammer from the Institute of Molecular Biology again in a
few days to discuss the course of action to be pursued for the
establishment of Quick Biotech. Henry Tan and Mike Hammer both hold
doctorates in biology and work at NUS as senior assistants. A few
months before, they patented a process for the production of multi
protein complexes, which they had already put to successful use,
and about which they had received favourable feedback. Now, the
three colleagues want to set-up a company called Quick Biotech in
order to apply the new technology to a wider field.
Background
The human body is exposed to numerous external influences and
internal genetic defects, which cause the proteins in our cells to
malfunction. Proteins constitute the basis of all biological
processes. If proteins no longer fulfill their function adequately
owing to defects, this often results in life-threatening illnesses,
such as cancer. This is why almost all drugs have effect on
proteins. Consequently, most research and development work for
drugs and therapies need protein, which is why both academic
research institutions and the pharmaceutical companies use proteins
as a basis to their research activities.
Recently, progress in fundamental research revealed the total of
the proteins in a cell, which in the case of human being amounts to
more than 40,000 proteins. It became obvious that the proteins in a
cell do not work individually; rather, they combine to act as
protein complexes that are made up of numerous protein components.
In addition, virtually all biological processes in cells are
executed by such protein complexes. This has crucial consequences
for research; in order to understand how proteins work, protein
machines must be explored as a whole, and not only their individual
protein components.
Nonetheless, academic institutes and the pharmaceutical industry
have almost exclusively focused on individual, isolated proteins.
The primary reason for this was that human protein machines are
very difficult to produce in a pure form. Although the development
of modern, recombinant methods now enables the production of
individual protein components, there is still a demand for a
technology that is able to provide sufficient volumes of entire
protein machine, which form the basis of biological functions. This
is also Michelle’s, Henry’s and Mike’s experience in their research
at NUS. They realize that no suitable technology for the production
of protein machines exists. This is why they developed their own
technology: the MultiBac technology.
The technology
The MultiBac technology uses a modified, yet greatly improved
version of the so called “baculovirus gene transfer vector” to
produce any combination of proteins in great volumes and of high
quality. The genes of a great number of proteins, such as human
ones, can be placed on this gene transfer vector. This process can
be carried out in an ordinary molecular biology laboratory. The
MultiBca gene transfer vector multiplies in cell cultures and
constitutes no danger to human beings. Therefore, no special health
and safety regulations are required to work with this system.
The gene transfer vector of the MultiBac system was developed to
provide it with a unique feature namely, that is particularly
careful in the production of the desired protein machines. For
customers, this is a guarantee of the unsurpassed quality of the
protein complex produced with the MultiBac technology. In
comparison with conventional processes, the simplified MultiBac
technology additionally saves a substantial amount of time for the
production of the desired protein product: it only takes weeks
rather than months. Also, the technology offers the possibility to
build numerous different protein complexes from the same protein
components on a modular basis and, thus, of supplying individual
solution to customers’ problems.
Laboratories of renowned research institutes already use MultiBac,
which NUS has made available as trial specimens. This shows that
the technology works, is mature and has a selling potential. The
process was patented last year by NUS, and since then it was
developed in the context of employment at the university. However,
the rights can be assigned to a start up, for instance, in the form
of an exclusive license.
The next steps to launch the venture
In autumn 2010, Michelle is in the final stages of her doctoral
thesis, which she wants to complete by the year. After that, she
needs to work full time for the new company. In contrast, Henry and
Mike want to retain their jobs at NUS and spend less time on the
company. As such, they would not be involved in the company’s
operative daily business but will assume an advisory function. They
will receive shares in the start-up but will not be on the company
payroll.
One of the key roles of Henry and Mike will be to guarantee long
term access to the latest findings in scientific research. This
model, whereby some of the founders remain at the university, has
already proved successful in a number of other biotechnology start
ups. Research in the field of biotechnology is very costly; both in
terms of time and money, so only by retaining close links with a
research institution will the company ensure that it will always
work with the latest technologies and, thus, remain
competitive.
One of the greatest challenges currently perceived by the team is
to secure funding for the new company. Although the founders are
able to invest S$200, 000 of their personal savings into the
enterprise and, thus, realize a small scale start up, present plans
are based on the assumption that at least S$500 000 of external
capital will be needed for the first two years.
These funds will primarily serve to finance Michelle’s position and
a small team of lab assistants in charge of producing the protein
complex for the clients. The product will be sold via a network of
sales agents, and other functions, such as accounting and finance,
will be outsourced to a professional accountant.
Answer all questions.
1. Should Michelle consider debt or equity to finance QuickBiotech?
Explain your answer.
2. Would you consider any alternative sources or finance? Which
one? Why?
3. Analyse other issues to be addressed before QuickBiotech is
launched.
Please write all your answers in essay format. Do not answer in point-form unless the questions mention “List” or “State”. It is not necessary to precede each answer with an introduction and end with a summary. Proceed directly with the answer
PLEASE GUYS NEED ANSWER IN ESSAY,THANK YOU
In: Operations Management
Given information from the attached article... Given that some EV producers from China’s BoP can penetrate the US market, what are some of the lessons from indigenous reverse innovation in the era of globalization?
Reverse innovation is “any innovation that is adopted first in the developing world.” Gurus such as C. K. Prahalad noted that from the bottom of the pyramid (BoP), reverse innovation is likely to diffuse from emerging economies to developed economies. Yet, concrete examples of reverse innovation are few. Of the list of examples noted in Govindarajan and Trimble’s excellent new book Reverse Innovation, all of them are multinational subsidiaries in emerging economies developing innovative, low cost products (such as GE’s storied portable ultrasound developed in China). Other examples in Reverse Innovation include Deere & Company, EMC, Harman, Logitech, PepsiCo, and P&G. Are there any examples of reverse innovation that are truly indigenous in nature (i.e., developed by local/non-multinational firms) and that have successfully penetrated developed markets? The electric vehicle (EV) makers in China can be a great example of such indigenous reverse innovation. An EV is an electric car that does not burn a single drop of gasoline. Known as a “plug-in” vehicle, an EV is totally based on battery power, has no tailpipe, and thus has zero emission. It would be more revolutionary than Toyota’s hybrid Prius, which drives on battery power before its gasoline engine kicks in and recharges the battery. If you go to Beijing or Shanghai, you do not see many EVs. Like everywhere else in the world, the roads and highways in urban China are full of conventional cars. But if you travel to certain rural areas (such as Liaocheng and Zibo in Shandong province), locally produced EVs seem everywhere. In fact, dozens of EV makers have popped up in China, and most of them are experimenting with new products in a great entrepreneurial drive. While most of them have a hard time cracking the top tier market in China, a small number of them—in a fashion described by Prahalad and Govindarajan—have already penetrated the US market. If you see someone (or you yourself are) driving a Wheego or CODA EV in the United States, you are witnessing indigenous reverse innovation at work. How can the humble EV makers of China accomplish so much in a remarkably short span of time? After all, none of the traditional automakers in China has cracked the US market. Other than the Nissan Leaf (which is a full EV), few traditional automakers active in the US market have launched EVs. From the Bottom of the Pyramid—Within China Prahalad’s BoP model divides the whole world in three tiers, with low-income emerging economies occupying the base. We can extend the BoP model to what is unfolding in the automobile industry within one emerging economy (Exhibit 1). In the Chinese automobile industry, the top tier is occupied by foreign-branded cars produced by the joint ventures (JVs) between global heavyweights and top Chinese automakers, such as Shanghai-GM, Shanghai-Volkswagen, and Guangzhou-Honda. As China’s auto market becomes the largest in the world, it has also become the most competitive—as measured by the number of new models unleashed in a given year. The global heavyweights increasingly bring their newest designs with the fanciest styles and the most powerful engines to produce in China. The second tier consists of smaller Chinese automakers and their JVs with smaller global players. All the top-tier and most of the second-tier are state-owned automakers. But the second tier also includes privately-owned producers such as Geely (which recently took over Volvo) and BYD (which is the most aggressive in developing EVs powered by lithium-ion battery technology). Overall, the second tier players’ capabilities and aspirations are similar to those of the top tier. The BoP in China’s automobile industry consists of nontraditional producers of specialty vehicles—some of which are not necessarily “automakers” if you define automakers as the Toyotas, Fords, and Fiats of the world or the SAICs, FAWs, and Dongfengs of China. The BoP producers in China can typically trace their roots to agricultural vehicles (such as tractors and small pickups), recreational vehicles (such as golf carts), and/or electric motorcycles (such as mopads). They tend to be much smaller than the top-tier and second-tier automakers in China, have little influence or brand awareness outside their own regions, and thus are outside the radar screens of the global heavyweights. While larger automakers in China (and their foreign JV partners) are still embracing a largely “wait-and-see” attitude regarding EVs, BoP automakers in China, being smaller and more entrepreneurial, have rushed in. While dozens of them have entered, a few leading ones have emerged as winners. For example, Shandong-based Shifeng has sold more than 10,000 EVs, and has built an EV plant with a maximum capacity of producing 200,000 vehicles a year. QUESTION From a resource-based view, what are some of the outstanding capabilities that EV producers in China have? Why their larger competitors (incumbents) in China do not have such capabilities? So far, the EVs in China are technically known as low-speed EVs, because their maximum speed is typically only 40–80 kilometers (25–50 miles) per hour. They typically have a range of 80–100 kilometers (50–65 miles). Instead of using the more advanced lithium-ion battery, they often use off-the-shelf lead acid battery. While primitive by conventional standards, these EVs are meeting a great deal of demand in rural China. In such a BoP market within China, road conditions are not great (so high speed is not necessary), income levels are low, but people’s needs to travel longer distances are increasing. Marketed at about 30,000 yuan (about $4,400), these cars are not as inexpensive as Tata’s storied Nano (priced at $2,000–$3,000 in India). With the rising income levels, EVs become increasingly affordable to the rural population in China. For the same distance traveled, electricity is only 25% the cost of gasoline. Last but not the least, with zero emission, EVs offer unparalleled environmental benefits—potentially a great solution to China’s pollution problems. A total of 70% of China’s population live in small towns and rural areas—that is a huge market of about 900 million (three times the total size of the US population). Few of the rural folks commute more than 20 kilometers (12.5 miles) a day. Travel speed rarely exceeds 60 kilometers (37.5 miles) per hour. Moreover, from an infrastructure standpoint, EVs have a huge advantage in rural areas because of the low population density and more spacious housing—typically with a yard or a driveway where EVs can be plugged in and charged with little need to build additional and costly charging stations. In contrast, widespread development of EVs in urban China has to overcome significant infrastructure challenges: population density is high and housing tight (high-rises everywhere). Few can afford single-family dwellings that would allow for convenient charging in the yard or on the driveway. Therefore, wide spread investment in and construction of charging stations is a must, but urban land is much more expensive than rural areas. Overall, whether EVs can take off in urban China remains a question mark, but EVs—especially low-speed EVs made by BoP automakers such as Shifeng—have already taken off in many parts of rural China. Institution-Based Barriers to BoP Automakers One of the recent (and controversial) policy initiatives in China is to promote “indigenous innovation.” The Chinese government has announced that in theory, EVs are being promoted to be one of the pillars of the automobile industry, which is one of the “strategic” industries earmarked for government support. A Development Plan for the “New Energy” Car Industry (2011–2020) has listed nine specific EV models on its catalog for nationwide promotion in terms of qualifying for subsidies. While many foreign firms and governments naturally worry that the promotion of “indigenous innovation” would shut them out and some have complained to the Chinese government, not a single foreign automaker has complained. The reason is very simple: instead of being promoted by the government, BoP automakers are being discriminated against by institution-based barriers in China. Foreign automakers simply have no need to worry about any preferential treatment of the BoP automakers. Instead, BoP EVs are technically not even defined as “cars” (or “passenger vehicles”) by existing Chinese standards. Only high-speed EVs are classified as “cars” in China. But of the nine (high-speed) EV models on the catalog for the Development Plan for the “New Energy” Car Industry (2011–2020) that are eligible for subsidies, only one high speed EV—the BYD F3DM with a maximum speed of 150 kilometers (95 miles) per hour and a maximum range of 100 kilometers (62.5 miles)—has entered mass market. But the BYD F3DM is a Prius-like hybrid and not a pure EV. Despite the subsidies, its high price and low performance have not attracted many customers. On the other hand, none of the dozens of BoP EV models appears on the government’s catalog for subsidies. Despite the proclamation to promote “green cars,” the omission of BoP EVs on the government promotion catalogue is not an oversight. It is intentional. This is because the government promotion catalogue is influenced by China’s top-tier and second-tier automakers (and their foreign JV partners). Although these incumbents themselves are not too enthusiastic to introduce EVs, they do not wish to legitimate BoP EVs. Because low speed EVs are not classified as “cars,” in most parts of China they do not need to carry a license plate, but then their owners cannot purchase insurance either. Such EVs thus are potentially a safety hazard. As a result, they may not be “street legal” in many parts of China. Because of their low speed and lack of insurance, they certainly cannot drive on freeways. So their mobility is by definition limited. This is not a huge problem for now, given their short range per charge. Just like few unlicensed drivers everywhere are afraid of being caught, unlicensed EVs in BoP markets in China are institutionally vulnerable—they may be declared illegal and ordered off the streets (for example, for creating traffic jams) if the political winds blow against them. To prevent that unfortunate fate from happening, some local and provincial governments have passed city, county, and provincial regulations to legalize and protect the BoP EV producers and owners. This localized rule-making has typically taken place in regions that house such BoP automakers, such as Liaocheng and Zibo in Shandong province, Dafeng in Jiangsu province, and Fuyang in Anhui province. To facilitate further development of the EV industry, Shandong has become the first province to explicitly legalize low-speed EVs and allow them to hit the roads. In the community of Chinese policymakers, executives, and scholars, supporters of low-speed BoP EVs have urged for tolerance and nurturing given these vehicles’ upside potential and environmental attractiveness. Critics argue that with little regulation, safety features, and insurance protection, low-speed EVs are likely to proliferate to create more traffic jams and safety hazards. Critics claim that local rules protecting locally produced EVs are “unconstitutional” because they violate the central government’s power in making and enforcing nationwide traffic and vehicle registration laws. While debates continue to rage, one thing for sure is that such indigenous reverse innovation has a hard time breaking into the top tier, urban market in its own home country. Go Global from BoP Markets Since going from the BoP to the top tier market in their own country is so tough, a number of Chinese EV makers have gone global. At least two of them have cracked the US market. In 2007, Hebei-based Shuanghuan Auto developed its first EV, the two-door, two-passenger Noble. Unfortunately, the Noble was not allowed to be marketed as a “car” in China (as noted earlier). In 2009, Shuanghuan Auto joined hands with Wheego, an Atlanta-based start-up specializing in all-electric cars. After considerable modification and enhancement in terms of control and safety features undertaken in Ontario, California, the Noble was marketed as the Wheego Whip EV in the United States starting in December 2009. With a top speed of 40–55 kilometers (25–35 miles) per hour, a range of 65 kilometer (40 miles), and 10 hours to fully charge its engine, the Wheego Whip retailed at $18,995. After adding options and taxes and then applying a $2,500 federal tax credit, the net price was $17,995. After a year, a significantly improved Noble became the Wheego Life. With a top speed of 105 kilometers (65 miles) per hour, Wheego Life was fully highway capable (and “street legal”) in the United States. It had a range of 160 kilometers (100 miles) and only needed five hours to fully charge its engine. The Wheego Life retailed at $32,995. After adding options and taxes and then applying a $7,500 federal tax credit, the net price was $26,495. In addition, some US state and local tax credit can further bring down the price tag. For example, in California, the Wheego Life appeared on the state’s list of approved “green cars” for state subsidies—this is no small accomplishment, considering that the Noble (and all BoP EVs in China) failed to appear on China’s Development Plan for the “New Energy” Car Industry (2011–2020) that would make them eligible for subsidies. As a result, Wheego Life owners in California could enjoy an additional $2,000 off. In addition, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia allowed EVs such as the Wheego Life to enjoy the privilege of using high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. Another example is Hebei-based Great Wall Motors. In 2011, Great Wall signed an alliance agreement with Los Angeles-based CODA Automotive, which would export EVs to the United States. With a top speed of 136 kilometers (85 miles) per hour, the four-door, five-passenger CODA car was also fully “street legal” in the United States. It had a range of 240 kilometers (150 miles) and needed six hours to fully charge. It retailed at $44,900. After applying a $7,500 federal tax credit, the net price was $37,400.
In: Economics
Daryl Corporation produces and sells hats. The Stockholders' Equity accounts on January 1, 2020 are as follows:
Common Stock, $5 par (100,000 shares authorized, 40,000 shares issued) $200,000
PIC in Excess par - Common Stock $100,000
Retained Earnings $750,000
Treasury Stock (5,000 shares at cost) $50,000
The following transactions occurred during the year:
1/09 Declared a Cash Dividend of $0.80 per share on the Common Stock outstanding.
Dividend will be paid on 2/09.
2/09 Paid the Cash Dividend that was previously declared on 1/16.
3/23 Reissued 2,500 shares of the Treasury Stock at $25 per share.
4/20 Issued 15,000 shares of Common Stock for $30 per share.
8/03 The directors declare a 2% stock dividend to be distributed on 9/13. The market
value is $40 per share on this date.
9/13 Distributed the Stock Dividend declared on 8/03.
11/17 Reissued the remaining 2,500 shares of Treasury Stock for $8 per share.
12/30 Declared a Cash Dividend of $0.90 per share on the Common Stock outstanding. The
dividend will be paid on 1/30.
12/31 Closed the $80,000 credit balance of the Income Summary account.
12/31 Closed the dividends accounts.
REQUIRED:
(1) Prepare the Journal Entries for the above transactions.
(2) Prepare the Statement of Stockholders' Equity (In Good Form) as of 12/31/20.
In: Accounting
1. List and explain the differences between a closed-end investment company and a mutual fund and give the sources of return from an investment in a closed-end investment company.
2. Could a closed-end investment company sell for a discount from net asset value but a mutual fund cannot sell for a discount? To answer this question you should differentiate a real estate investment trust (REIT) from a firm involved in building, developing, and owning properties.
In: Finance
The veins of the heart muscle merge to form the _____________________ which empties into the __________________ .
The fetal lung bypass from the pulmonary trunk to the aorta closes at birth and becomes ______________________________.
The stabilizing “strings” of the tricuspid and bicuspid valves are called ___________________________.
The muscular ridges inside the ventricles are called ________________________________________.
During ventricular systole, the AV valves are: open or closed
During ventricular systole (the ventricular ejection phase), the semilunar valves are: open or closed
During isovolumetric relaxation, the semilunar valves and AV valves are: open or closed
In: Anatomy and Physiology
showing your work, use the 2018-2019 10k from apple and microsoft to calculate the average days to collect as well as inventory turnover ratio.
file:///C:/Users/chase/Downloads/Apple%2010-K%20for%202018.pdf
file:///C:/Users/chase/Downloads/Microsoft%2010-K%20for%202019.pdf
In: Accounting
In 2010 polls indicated that 73% of Americans favored mandatory testing of students in public schools as a way to rate the school. This year in a poll of 1,000 Americans 71% favor mandatory testing for this purpose. Has public opinion changed since 2010?
We test the hypothesis that the percentage supporting mandatory testing is less than 73% this year. The p-value is 0.016.
Which of the following interpretation of this p-value is valid?
In: Statistics and Probability
. Presented below is information related to equipment owned by ALALI Company at December 31, 2010.
Cost SAR 7,000,000
Accumulated depreciation to date 1,500,000
Value-in-use 5,000,000
Fair value less cost of disposal 4,400,000
Assume that ALALI will continue to use this asset in the future. As of December 31, 2010, the equipment has a remaining useful of 4 years.
Instructions
Prepare the journal entry (if any) to record the impairment of the asset at December 31, 2010. ( 1 mark)
Prepare the journal entry to record depreciation expense for 2011. (1 mark)
The recoverable amount of the equipment at December 31, 2011, is SAR 5,250,000. Prepare the journal entry (if any) necessary to record this increase
In: Accounting